Morgan: I am not sure what you mean. A session is an accurate metric for browsers that actually use the site. I have used AwStats as well as other tools. The metrics are a bit less accurate in Awstats are they are in other tools, but overall a session is a session. Hits and "page views" don't really weigh as much for determining what browsers are hitting your site compared to actual session. Note: feed readers are browsers too... the actually load a XHTML page for viewing (with full design, just like any other browser) inside of them. They typically use IE or Firefox for an engine... but they don't typically use that as their agent string as I understand it... though I could be wrong. Maybe one of the developers for the feed readers out there wants to speak up.
Mary: Well, I guess if I titled this post "user agent stats" it would be a different story eh? Point being I wanted to talk about specifically stand-alone web browsers. Heaven knows you can browse using your gas pump or refrigerator. The focus of this post was specifically about web browsers. You should note that I also didn

For those curious, this should be the percentage of each “browser brand” within the above cited stand-alone browser total (which accounted for about 39.14% of the user-agents visiting Digital Web Magazine in this sample):
• Internet Explorer: 40.37%;
• Mozilla: 24.99%;
• Firefox: 20.39%;
• Opera: 8.20%;
• Safari: 5.31%;
• Konqueror: 0.74%.

Nick: The stats show exactly what I was interested in now :)
What I meant was that unfiltered stats, that shows bots, spiders and RSS readers are usually not very interesting for me, when making the tough decisions on what browsers (IE, Firefoxy, Safari, etc) to support, and ultimately test in.